@Loquat wrote:
@Anonymous wrote:
@CreditCuriosity wrote:
@Anonymous wrote:
@Loquat wrote:
@Anonymous
I think this advice is a bit of an overstep. I understand some don't want to play the tax transcript game with Amex but this is a simple request for bank statements which is, in my opinion, a lot better than having to turn over your tax info.
If the OP decides to comply or not is completely their choice and it will be respected around these here forums...but suggesting that someone ditch Amex (or any lender) simply because they ask for income verification as they allow your to borrow thousands of unsecured dollars is a bit of an overstep in my opinion.
To the OP, browse the forums and ask questions like you have. Take in all the information you so desire and make an informed decision. Don't let the thoughts and opinions of anyone here outweigh that of your own. Best of luck to you in whatever decision you make.
True - a bank statement request is better than a tax form request.
And yes, it's their choice on whether to comply or not; however, they're looking for advice. My advice is to just laugh at them and walk away. Nobody should have to jump through hoops for a card unless it's the Centurion Card or the JP Morgan Reserve or something.
Providing 3 bank statements is certainly not jumping through hoops.. If more lenders even asked for the basics alot less people with get into credit trouble. Just my 2 cents.. Not saying that is OP's case at all, but blindly trusting an unsecure debt without any proof of assets is risky and putter any lender at risk. Least with a car it is a secured asset and can be repoed. I hardly think it is asking to much for pay stubs
Agreed - but do it before lending the money in the first place... Not after the fact.
So with your analogy you're saying if a card holder earns a quarter million dollars annually, today, when they apply for a card that should be true and indicative of their future earnings and a lender shouldn't at any point ever request validity of income afterwards?
I know and work with people who are promoted and demoted on regular basis. Companies come and go, people retire, get laid off, terminated, or just flat out quit. I'd be willing to bet that a small percentage of people ever call lenders and report a DECREASE in come. Should a lender continue to let those who have income reduced continue to borrow at the same level in 2018 when their earning a quarter mil even if by next year their not even earning half of that? It's interesting no one has a problem providing income when they're wanting an increase but if the lender wants to verify that you can actually afford the credit given, then game over.
I agree with CC, lenders should ask for a lot more up front and in my opinion should continue to ask for validity thereafter if risk calls for it. Like it or not, as I've said before, their money, their rules. And to those who say to walk away from lenders that do this...if every lender would step up their verification game they could *potentially* weed out those who have problems with compliance and send them back to the debit card world from which they came.
My analogy says to ask for proof of income before approving the card.
If a lender is so concerned about risk, then lower the credit limit or the "purchasing power." It's easier for the bank to do that, and the cardholder might be a little p'd, but at least they're able to still use their card and not have it suspended for at least a week.
The issue with CLI's is that the cardholder manually requested this action. AMEX seems to just randomly FR people for what seems like no reason at all. I could go charge a pack of gum on my Delta Gold card right now, and that may trigger a FR for all I know.
Could all lenders do what AMEX does? Sure... But the bottom line is that they don't, which is why it's easy to just laugh at AMEX and move to another issuer to put all of your spending through.
.
